Kevin

Really?? Are you certain? Which groups are you speaking of? It seems as if you are the one struggling with logic. Pulling our of Iraq and leaving Iraqi forces to manage doesn't logically follow from my comments to any degree. Even so, that is actually the plan. It was the Iraqi forces that recently said they would have gone after the insurgents in Sumarra with or without the assistance of U.S. Forces. They, with the help of U.S. Forces did succeed in regaining control of that city. With the continued training of Iraqui police and military, we will eventually be turning over the management of their own country to them.

WTF? (The "F" is for "Frick" or "Freak" or "Fetch," by the way.) Yet Kerry's "plan" anticipates that our French "allies" will take over our fight against France's current "allies," the insurgents. Right. Kerry blames Bush for losing Osama by not "using the best troops in the world" when Bush in fact did exactly what Kerry says he would do. Bush turned the task of catching Osama over to our new ally, Afghanistan. Kerry would enlist France (who has clearly said they won't help even if Kerry is elected) to help out yet Bush gets lambasted for doing the same thing with Afghanistan.Can't have it both ways sentator. Flip Flop, Flip Flop.

Peace/Starsky/Sandy/ect., ect., ect., is back as Amilla? How interesting.

No, PD, the definition of greed is the belief that one can benefit from the system without giving anything back! Has anyone said, in this thread, that they shouldn't pay into the system that they benefit from? I've seen no one advocate a non-tax system. Your comment seems to be nothing other than a red herring.

And you're ok with the government telling you that you have to support this kid in college whether you like it or not? Do you not think that with your experience and general charitable attitude that you should be able to help of your own free will instead of being forced to help?You are entirely mistaken concerning your view of the rich and taxes. The rich pay more in taxes. Period. Are you not familiar with the graduated tax? Are you at all familiar with the Alternative Minimum Tax? With the graduated tax system we pay an increasing amount of our taxable income to the government. The AMT phases out various deductions so that those who make more money through their hard work and investments aren't able to avoid paying more tax.

Didn't say that. Didn't say anything like it. Nice dodge though. Can you not directly respond to my question?

Do you mean to suggest that those who believe Gordon B. Hinckley to be a living prophet believe so because they fear they will be shot if they disagree? You've attempted to draw a parallel yet you've provided no evidence or reason - just a baseless suggestion. Not too bright.

Not so. LDS doctrine is that those who die before the age of accountability (8) are saved in the Kingdom of God. I'm glad you are able to get your questions answered here.

What? How are these two even closely related? The baptism of infants is wrong because infants havn't sufficient knowledge to sin. You may be able to reason that its in the bible but it is not clearly stated and such a view is highly disputed - just consider the christian denominations that baptise infants i.e. sprinkling etc. The Book of Mormon is very clear on this doctrine such that there can be no reasonable dispute. Nice try though.

Now that may explain it. The difference between the tacky "American" wedding car decorations as compared to the sophisticated "Canadian" style of decorating a wedding car with flowers. Makes sense. M. I couldn't agree more. Tacky, tacky tacky.

Court? I can think of better ways to begin your birthday!! Hopefully you were able to talk the judge into a lesser fine. Happy Birthday!!

Tell us more about this guarantee. How is it that you are privy to the mind and will of Christ? Yes, good question. Please share Shantress.

Us Mormons believe that the Temple is a Sacred edifice where sacred covenants are made with God. Actions and/or an attitude of reverence on what we believe to be holy ground is hardly being a stick-in-the-mud. IF you have a problem with it, nobody is forcing you (you in the general sense) to be there. Hopefully you (again in the general sense) will have a enough respect for the beliefs of others to respect their wishes.

Somebody please give me a good reason to delete this link.

You two are making me sick. Bat, go edit your post - and you know which one I'm talking about.

I suspect that a least a few of these remain members in an attempt to add credibility to their book. "Hey, I am a member so I know what I'm talking about!"

I don't know where you get your information but its false. I have known and know at least a few who have received their endowment since President Hinckley was called. Ths standard is that our youth are not to receive their endowment until such time that they are sufficiently mature and reach a sufficient level of committment to keep the covenants they will make in the temple. Youth reach that level of maturity at differing times and so they receive their endowment at differing times. It is up to the leaders, bishops and stake presidents, as well as the individual to make such a determination. I don't think its wise or incumbant upon you to question those decisions. Let the Lord run his church the way he ses fit - he'll deal with any mistakes made by leaders. Our bishop told it to our neighbor, who was our bishop 10 years ago, just two nights ago. So did this bishop lie? Oh, well, yes. Of course. You could most reasonably conclude that the bishop lied based upon this heresay. I mean, there really is no other reasonable conclusion is there? It makes no sense at all to consider that perhaps the bishop was mistaken or that your third hand information might be somewhat inaccurate. Yes, he must have lied.

I don't know where you get your information but its false. I have known and know at least a few who have received their endowment since President Hinckley was called. Ths standard is that our youth are not to receive their endowment until such time that they are sufficiently mature and reach a sufficient level of committment to keep the covenants they will make in the temple. Youth reach that level of maturity at differing times and so they receive their endowment at differing times. It is up to the leaders, bishops and stake presidents, as well as the individual to make such a determination. I don't think its wise or incumbant upon you to question those decisions. Let the Lord run his church the way he ses fit - he'll deal with any mistakes made by leaders.

I can assure you from personal experience that is completely untrue. I guess it depends upon your bishop and stake president. I know many, many, who have been denied. If so, then I believe that has been done contrary to the church handbook of instructions. I've seen many many who were taken care of regardless of tithing, church attendance etc. I've never seen one turned away and I've seen hundreds.

Have you ever read a book by FARMS? You wouldn't ask that if you have. You're kidding, right? Bat himself admitted that he wasn't trying to say anything. I've read some of the FARMS stuff and it has all seemed quite comprehensible to me - that that I have read.

Is he right about exmormonism being a cult? I'd have to see his actual comments in context. You wouldn't really ask me to express an opinion without having first seen the context would you?

As long as you can do so without breaking the clearly stated board rules then I say go for it. It is entirely possible and you may even be sufficiently intelligent to make an argument without being demeaning or disrespectful. Let me just point out that that using terms such as "suck" in reference to apologetic articles is not much of an argument. What are you talking about? Would you care to explain your comment? It doesn't make much sense to me.

Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS): http://www.farmsresearch.com/Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR): http://www.fairlds.org/ Zion's Lighthouse Message Board (ZLMB): http://pub26.ezboard.com/bpacumenispages FAIR has a message board that regularly bans bat who goes by the name of Mal: http://www.fairboards.org/

Because some mormons consider everything that FARMS writes to be scripture/doctrine. I've never met or talked to such a person. Or, at least not that I know of. Can you perhaps point to any such persons here, at FAIR or ZLMB?

LOL!!! I guess I'd better clear this up. It stands for Loyal Follower of Daniel C. Petersen. Its a joke - a few people on ZLMB refer to themselves as LFoDCP because of a funny conversation there a few years ago (which conversation I've forgotten). Bat, I am because he's right. I'm a big fan of right.